________________
-
-
EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF SELF-SUFFICIENT VALIDITY'. 1291
TEXTS (2851-2852). "FOR ITS OWN PRODUCTION, THE JAR NEEDS SUCH CAUSES AS TRE LUMP OF CLAY, THE POTTER'S STICK, THE WHEEL AND OTHER THINGS; BUT IN THE ACTION OF CONTAINING WATER, IT DOES NOT NEED THESE CAUSES.-THUS, ULTIMATELY, THERE MUST BE SELFSUFFICIENCY OF THE VALIDITY; IF THE VALIDITY WERE DUE TO OTHER CAUSES, THEN THERE WOULD
BE AN INFINITE REGRESS."-(2851-2852)
COMMENTARY.
Having thus shown that there is no incongruity in his Proposition, the Mimāmsaka proceeds to show the Invariable Concomitance of his Reason (Premiss)—' because it is present when the other is present ?- Thus ultimately, etc. etc. Ante'-in the last cognition of the series.- Tat'validity.
Question - Why should it be ultimately admitted ? Answer: "If the validity, etc. etc.—(2851-2852)
The same idea is further clarified :
TEXTS (2853-2854).
"IF THE VERY VALIDITY OF THE INITIAL COGNITION WERE DEPENDENT UPON OTHER COGNITIONS, THEN, SEEKING FOR SUCH CORROBORATING COGNITIONS AT EACH STEP, WE COULD GET TO NO RESTING PLACE; BECAUSE, JUST AS THE FIRST COGNITION WOULD NEED CORROBORATION BY THE SECOND COGNITION, SO SHOULD WE SEEK FOR THE CORROBORATION OF THAT CORROBORATIVE COGNITION ALSO.”—(2853
2854)
COMMENTARY.
Maulika'-pertaining to the initial or first cognition ; i.e. the validity inhering in the initial cognition.
Validity, if extraneous, could be due either to the corroboration of the resultant activity, or to the recognition of the perfect character of the cause of the cognition. The former of these cannot be accepted; this is shown by the words—Just as, etc. etc. (2853-2854)
It might be argued that in the case of the Cognition which is in conformity with effective action, its validity is held to be inherent, self-sufficient ; hence there can be no Infinite Regress.
The answer to this is as follows:
